To summarize the most important occurrence of this dynasty: during the reign of Basil I, the victorious wars in Asia Minor, Cappadocia and Cilicia were fought against the Arabs (878-879), and the empire re-conquered southern Italy. During the reigns of Romain Lécapènes and Romain II, the Byzantine army entered Armenia Minor and Syria and fortified its hold there. During the reign of Nicephorus Phocas the empire continued its successful resistance in Cilicia and Syria (964-968). John Tzimiskes continued the war which stretched to Mesopotamia and Palestine with war breaking out once more against Bulgaria. In fact, for the 150 years preceding the death of Basil II, the Byzantine Empire, experienced nothing less than success and progress. Thus Rambaud writes about this dynasty: "It created rulers, in particular Basil II, who in our eyes are the greatest military personalities in the history of Europe during the Middle Ages." 83
Up until now we have concentrated on the military aspects; we should also consider the political elements. For instance, the creation and strengthening of the "shield-countries" along all the frontiers of the empire. These countries (the republics of Naples, Gaëte and Amalfi in southern Italy, the Slavic countries, the Balkans and Crimea, Armenia and Iberia) were the allies of Byzantine and constituted its first line of defence. Moreover, regarding religion, the conversion of the Russian people was the most significant achievements of the empire. Finally, the empire underwent a revolutionary re-organization which, except for the reign of Emperor Diocletianus, was without comparison, and the institution of such a framework of laws which put Basil I on par with Justinianus in sculpting the constitution.
The dynasty also brought a new element to the Byzantine Empire: continuity of family, a genuine Armenian sentiment, and inheritance of the throne. This new dynamic created an interest for the monarchy and the survival of the dynasty, and increased the sympathy of the people for the royal family and its heirs. As Bussel points out, comprehension of Byzantine history is, impossible without taking into consideration the struggle between the two completely different and opposing factors in the empire. These factors were the Greek way of thinking in Constantinople, which was for a centralized government, founded on civil rights and the heritage of the traditional dynasties, and the Armenian way of thinking, which was of a military mind and founded on feudalism, with pride of place for the family. 87
We can conclude that this period of Byzantine history, from the 8th century to the 10th century, is characterized by the dominance of the Armenian element. Until the end of the 7th century, Byzantine was dominated by a learned bureaucratic rule, the structure of which, in many aspects, was the same as modern governments, but that had lost all its measures and assets. It was a government which had become out-dated as its institutions and customs had fallen in decay. It showed, in particular, signs that it was no longer capable of expanding its military forces and thereby its inability to defend itself against an Asia which had been united in the conversion to Islam.
As Bussel purports, this doomed empire was granted a new lease of life through its Armenian leaders; a role which can be compared to that of the Germanic people in the history of the West. 88
It was precisely this Armenian sovereignty which saved the empire. The decline of the bureaucratic system and the rise of feudalism, which went hand in hand with the Armenian nobilities' way of thinking, also meant a change in the governmental structure which renewed the life of the empire.
As Bussel concludes: "The Armenian people imprinted on Byzantine its eternal and unforgivable strong and unyielding character, constituting more than half of its population, and this feudal rebirth gave the empire a chance to prolong its existence by another 500 years." 89
|
